{"id":53774,"date":"2019-12-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2019-12-09T21:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/blog\/blog_prohoster\/sravnenie-proizvoditelnosti-instrumentov-obhoda-blokirovok-vpn"},"modified":"2020-02-18T14:01:42","modified_gmt":"2020-02-18T11:01:42","slug":"sravnenie-proizvoditelnosti-instrumentov-obhoda-blokirovok-vpn","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/blog\/administrirovanie\/sravnenie-proizvoditelnosti-instrumentov-obhoda-blokirovok-vpn","title":{"rendered":"Compararea performan\u021bei instrumentelor de o ocolire a bloc\u0103rilor VPN","gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"text"}]},"content":{"rendered":"

Pe m\u0103sur\u0103 ce accesul la diverse resurse online este tot mai mult restric\u021bionat, \u00eentrebarea despre cum s\u0103 ocolim blocajele devine din ce \u00een ce mai relevant\u0103, iar, prin urmare, \u00eentrebarea \u201eCum s\u0103 ocolim blocajele mai rapid?\u201d devine tot mai actual\u0103.<\/p>\n

Vom l\u0103sa deoparte tema eficien\u021bei, din perspectiva ocolirii listei albe \u0219i a listei negre, pentru o alt\u0103 discu\u021bie \u0219i vom compara pur \u0219i simplu performan\u021ba celor mai populare instrumente de ocolire a blocajelor.<\/p>\n

Aten\u021bie: \u00cen articol, sub spoilere, vor fi multe imagini.
\n<\/a><\/noindex>
\nDeclinarea: acest articol compar\u0103 performan\u021ba solu\u021biilor populare VPN \u0219i proxy, \u00een condi\u021bii apropiate de \u201eideale\u201d. Rezultatele ob\u021binute \u0219i descrise aici nu trebuie neap\u0103rat s\u0103 coincid\u0103 cu rezultatele tale \u00een teren. Deoarece cifra din speedtest adesea va depinde nu de c\u00e2t de performant este instrumentul de ocolire, ci de modul \u00een care providerul t\u0103u \u00eel limiteaz\u0103 QoS sau \u00eel blocheaz\u0103.<\/p>\n

Metodologia<\/h3>\n

\nLa furnizorul \u00een cloud (DO) au fost achizi\u021bionate 3 VPS-uri \u00een diferite \u021b\u0103ri ale lumii. 2 \u00een Olanda, 1 \u00een Germania. Au fost alese cele mai performante VPS-uri (\u00een func\u021bie de num\u0103rul de nuclee) disponibile pentru cont \u00een oferta pentru credite cu reducere. <\/p>\n

Pe primul server olandez a fost desf\u0103\u0219urat un server privat iperf3. <\/p>\n

Pe al doilea server olandez sunt desf\u0103\u0219urate, pe r\u00e2nd, diverse servere pentru instrumentele de ocolire a blocajelor. <\/p>\n

Pe VPS-ul din Germania a fost desf\u0103\u0219urat un sistem de operare desktop Linux (Xubuntu) cu VNC \u0219i un desktop virtual. Acest VPS este un client ipotetic, iar pe el sunt instalate \u0219i lansate diferite clien\u021bi de proxy VPN. <\/p>\n

M\u0103sur\u0103torile de vitez\u0103 se fac de trei ori, orient\u00e2ndu-ne pe media, folosind 3 instrumente: \u00een Chromium prin web-speedtest; \u00een Chromium prin fast.com; din consol\u0103 prin iperf3 prin proxy chains4 (\u00een acele locuri unde este necesar s\u0103 direc\u021bion\u0103m traficul iperf3 prin proxy). <\/p>\n

Conexiunea direct\u0103 \u201eclient\u201d-server iperf3 ofer\u0103 o vitez\u0103 de 2 Gbps, \u00een iperf3, \u0219i un pic mai pu\u021bin \u00een fast speedtest.<\/p>\n

Cititorul curios poate \u00eentreba, \u201ede ce nu ai ales speedtest-cli?\u201d \u0219i va avea dreptate. <\/p>\n

Speedtest-ul s-a dovedit a fi un mod nesigur \u0219i inadecvat de a m\u0103sura l\u0103\u021bimea de band\u0103, din motive pe care nu le \u00een\u021beleg. Trei m\u0103sur\u0103tori consecutive au putut oferi trei rezultate complet diferite sau, de exemplu, s\u0103 arate o l\u0103\u021bime de band\u0103 mult mai mare dec\u00e2t viteza porturilor pe VPS-urile mele. Poate c\u0103 problema se afl\u0103 \u00een nepriceperea mea, dar mi-a p\u0103rut imposibil s\u0103 fac cercet\u0103ri cu un astfel de instrument.<\/p>\n

\u00cen ceea ce prive\u0219te rezultatele celor trei metode de m\u0103surare (speedtest, fast, iperf), consider c\u0103 indicatorii iperf sunt cei mai preci\u0219i, fiabili \u0219i credibili, \u00een timp ce fast speedtest ofer\u0103 doar valori de referin\u021b\u0103. Dar unele instrumente de tunelare nu au permis finalizarea a trei m\u0103sur\u0103tori prin iperf3 \u0219i, \u00een astfel de cazuri, se poate lua \u00een considerare fast speedtest.<\/p>\n

speedtest-ul ofer\u0103 rezultate diferite<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Instrumentar<\/h3>\n

\nAu fost testate 24 de instrumente de tunelare diferite \u0219i\/sau combina\u021bii ale acestora, pentru fiecare dintre ele voi oferi c\u00e2teva explica\u021bii \u0219i impresiile mele despre lucrul cu ele. Dar, \u00een esen\u021b\u0103, scopul a fost de a compara vitezele shadowsocks (\u0219i o mul\u021bime de diferite obfuscatoare pentru el) openVPN \u0219i wireguard.<\/p>\n

\u00cen acest material nu voi aborda \u00een detaliu \u00eentrebarea 'cum s\u0103 ascundem cel mai bine traficul pentru a nu fi deconectat', deoarece ocolirea bloc\u0103rilor este o m\u0103sur\u0103 reactiv\u0103 - ne adapt\u0103m la ce folose\u0219te cenzorul \u0219i ac\u021bion\u0103m pe baza acesteia.<\/p>\n

Rezultate<\/h3>\n

<\/p>\n

Strongswan ipsec<\/h4>\n

\nDin impresiile mele - foarte u\u0219or de configurat, func\u021bioneaz\u0103 destul de stabil. Ca avantaje - cu adev\u0103rat multiplatform\u0103, f\u0103r\u0103 a fi nevoie s\u0103 c\u0103ut\u0103m clien\u021bi pentru fiecare platform\u0103.<\/p>\n

desc\u0103rcare — 993 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 770 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

tunel SSH<\/h4>\n

\nDespre utilizarea SSH ca instrument de tunelare nu a scris probabil dec\u00e2t cel lene\u0219. Ca dezavantaje - 'solu\u021bia improvizat\u0103', adic\u0103 nu po\u021bi s\u0103 o desf\u0103\u0219ori dintr-un client convenabil \u0219i frumos pe fiecare platform\u0103. Avantajele - performan\u021b\u0103 bun\u0103, nu este necesar s\u0103 instalezi nimic pe server.<\/p>\n

desc\u0103rcare — 1270 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1140 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea<\/p>\n

OpenVPN<\/h4>\n

\nOpenVPN a fost testat \u00een 4 moduri de func\u021bionare: tcp, tcp+sslh, tcp+stunnel, udp.<\/p>\n

Serverele OpenVPN au fost configurate automat, cu instalarea streisand.<\/p>\n

Dup\u0103 cum se poate judeca, \u00een prezent, doar modul de func\u021bionare prin stunnel este rezistent la DPI avansat. Motivul cre\u0219terii anormale a l\u0103\u021bimii de band\u0103 atunci c\u00e2nd se ruleaz\u0103 openVPN-tcp \u00een stunnel nu \u00eemi este clar, testele au fost efectuate \u00een mai multe r\u00e2nduri, la momente diferite \u0219i \u00een zile diferite, rezultatul a fost acela\u0219i. Poate c\u0103 aceasta este legat\u0103 de set\u0103rile stivei de re\u021bea stabilite la desf\u0103\u0219urarea Streisand, scrie\u021bi dac\u0103 ave\u021bi idei despre motivul pentru care este a\u0219a.<\/p>\n

openvpntcp: desc\u0103rcare — 760 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 659 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nopenvpntcp+sslh: desc\u0103rcare — 794 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 693 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nopenvpntcp+stunnel: desc\u0103rcare — 619 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 943 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nopenvpnudp: desc\u0103rcare — 756 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 580 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Openconnect<\/h4>\n

\nNu este cea mai popular\u0103 unealt\u0103 de o ocolire a bloc\u0103rilor, face parte din pachetul Streisand, a\u0219a c\u0103 s-a decis s\u0103 fie testat\u0103 \u0219i aceasta.<\/p>\n

desc\u0103rcare — 895 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 715 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Wireguard<\/h4>\n

\nUnealt\u0103 popular\u0103, utilizat\u0103 de utilizatorii occidentali, dezvoltatorii protocolului au primit chiar ni\u0219te granturi pentru dezvoltare din fonduri de protec\u021bie. Func\u021bioneaz\u0103 ca un modul \u00een kernelul Linux, prin UDP. Recent au ap\u0103rut clien\u021bi pentru Windows\/iOS.<\/p>\n

A fost g\u00e2ndit de creator ca o modalitate simpl\u0103 \u0219i rapid\u0103 de a viziona Netflix din afara Statelor Unite. <\/p>\n

De aici rezult\u0103 avantajele \u0219i dezavantajele. Avantajele \u2014 un protocol foarte rapid, relativ simplu de instalat\/setat. Dezavantajele \u2014 dezvoltatorul nu l-a creat ini\u021bial cu scopul de a ocoli blocaje serioase, astfel c\u0103 WireGuard poate fi detectat u\u0219or de c\u0103tre cele mai simple instrumente, inclusiv Wireshark.<\/p>\n

protocolul WireGuard \u00een Wireshark<\/b>\"Compararea
\ndesc\u0103rcare — 1681 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1638 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nCe este interesant, protocolul WireGuard este utilizat \u00een clientul ter\u021b tunsafe, care, atunci c\u00e2nd este folosit cu acela\u0219i server WireGuard, ofer\u0103 rezultate mult mai slabe. Este foarte probabil ca clientul WireGuard pentru Windows s\u0103 prezinte rezultate similare:<\/p>\n

tunsafeclient: desc\u0103rcare — 1007 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1366 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

OutlineVPN<\/h4>\n

\nOutline este o implementare a serverului \u0219i clientului Shadowsocks cu o interfa\u021b\u0103 grafic\u0103 frumoas\u0103 \u0219i confortabil\u0103 de la Jigsaw de la Google. \u00cen Windows, clientul Outline const\u0103 pur \u0219i simplu \u00eentr-un set de wrapper-e pentru binarele shadowsocks-local (clientul shadowsocks-libev) \u0219i badvpn (binarul tun2socks, care redirec\u021bioneaz\u0103 tot traficul ma\u0219inii \u00eentr-un proxy socks local).<\/p>\n

C\u00e2ndva, Shadowsocks a fost rezistent la marele firewall chinezesc, dar din ultimele recenzii, acum nu mai este a\u0219a. Spre deosebire de Shadowsocks, \u201edin cutie\u201d nu suport\u0103 conectare cu obfuscare prin pluginuri, dar acest lucru se poate face manual, juc\u00e2ndu-se cu serverul \u0219i clientul.<\/p>\n

desc\u0103rcare — 939 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 930 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

ShadowsocksR<\/h4>\n

\nShadowsocksR este un fork al originalului Shadowsocks, scris \u00een Python. Practic, reprezint\u0103 un Shadowsocks la care au fost ata\u0219ate c\u00e2teva metode de obfuscare a traficului. <\/p>\n

Exist\u0103 forks ssR pe libev \u0219i alte platforme. L\u0103\u021bimea de band\u0103 sc\u0103zut\u0103 este probabil datorat\u0103 codului. Originalul Shadowsocks \u00een Python nu este semnificativ mai rapid.<\/p>\n

shadowsocksR: desc\u0103rcare 582 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 541 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Shadowsocks<\/h4>\n

\nUn instrument chinezesc pentru ocolirea blocajelor, care randomizeaz\u0103 traficul \u0219i prin alte metode minunate \u00eempiedic\u0103 analiza automat\u0103. P\u00e2n\u0103 de cur\u00e2nd, GFW nu blocase acest serviciu, spun c\u0103 acum este blocat, doar dac\u0103 se activeaz\u0103 UDP relay. <\/p>\n

Cross-platform (exist\u0103 clien\u021bi pentru orice platform\u0103), suport\u0103 lucrul cu PT de tip obfuscatorilor Tor, exist\u0103 c\u00e2teva obfuscatoare proprii sau adaptate, rapide.<\/p>\n

Exist\u0103 o mul\u021bime de implement\u0103ri ale clien\u021bilor \u0219i serverelor Shadowsocks, \u00een diferite limbi. \u00cen testare, serverul a fost shadowsocks-libev, iar clien\u021bii au fost diferi\u021bi. Cel mai rapid client Linux s-a dovedit a fi shadowsocks2 pe Go, distribuit ca client default \u00een Streisand, c\u00e2t de mai performant este shadowsocks-windows nu pot spune. \u00cen majoritatea testelor ulterioare, s-a folosit tocmai shadowsocks2 ca \u0219i client. Capturile cu testarea pur\u0103 a shadowsocks-libev nu au fost realizate, din cauza evidentului dezavantaj al acestei implement\u0103ri.<\/p>\n

shadowsocks2: desc\u0103rcare — 1876 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1981 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nshadowsocks-rust: desc\u0103rcare — 1605 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1895 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nShadowsocks-libev: desc\u0103rcare \u2014 1584 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare \u2014 1265 mbits.<\/i><\/p>\n

Simple-obfs<\/h4>\n

\nPlugin pentru Shadowsocks, \u00een prezent \u00een statut de \"depreciat\", dar \u00eenc\u0103 func\u021bioneaz\u0103 (de\u0219i nu \u00eentotdeauna bine). A fost \u00een mare parte \u00eenlocuit de pluginul v2ray-plugin. Obfusc\u0103 traficul fie sub http-websocket (permi\u021b\u00e2nd s\u0103 falsifice headerul gazduirii de destina\u021bie, f\u0103c\u00e2nd s\u0103 par\u0103 c\u0103 vizionezi nu pornhub, ci, de exemplu, site-ul constitu\u021biei RF), fie sub pseudo-tls (pseudo, deoarece nu folose\u0219te certificate, cele mai simple DPI precum nDPI detecteaz\u0103 ca \"tls f\u0103r\u0103 certificat\". \u00cen modul tls, falsificarea headerelor nu mai este posibil\u0103). <\/p>\n

Rapid, easy to install from the repository with one command, very simple to configure, has a built-in failover function (when traffic from a non-simple-obfs client comes to the port that simple-obfs listens to, it forwards it to the address you specify in the settings \u2014 thus eliminating the need for manual checking of port 80, for example, simply by redirecting to a website via http, as well as blocking through connection probes).<\/p>\n

shadowsockss-obfs-tls: desc\u0103rcare — 1618 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1971 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nshadowsockss-obfs-http: desc\u0103rcare — 1582 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1965 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nSimple-obfs in http mode can also work through a CDN reverse proxy (for example, Cloudflare), thus for our provider, the traffic will appear as http plaintext traffic to Cloudflare, which helps to better hide our tunnel and, at the same time, separate the traffic entry and exit points \u2014 the provider sees that your traffic is going towards adresa IP<\/a> CDN, while extremist likes on pictures are given at that moment from the VPS's IP address. It should be noted that specifically s-obfs through CF works ambiguously, periodically not opening some http resources, for example. Thus, testing upload using iperf through shadowsockss-obfs+CF was unsuccessful, but judging by the speed test results, the bandwidth is at the level of shadowsocksv2ray-plugin-tls+CF. I do not attach screenshots from iperf3, as they are not reliable.<\/p>\n

desc\u0103rcare (speedtest) — 887; \u00eenc\u0103rcare (speedtest) — 1154.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nDownload (iperf3) \u2014 1625; upload (iperf3) \u2014 NA.<\/i><\/p>\n

v2ray-plugin<\/h4>\n

\nThe V2ray-plugin has replaced simple-obfs as the main 'official' obfuscator for ss-libev. Unlike simple-obfs, it is not yet available in repositories, and you need to either download a pre-built binary or compile it yourself.<\/p>\n

Supports 3 operating modes: default, http-websocket (with support for spoofing destination host headers); tls-websocket (unlike s-obfs, this is full-fledged tls traffic, recognized by any web server reverse proxy, and allows you to set up tls termination on Cloudflare servers or in nginx); quic \u2014 works over udp, but unfortunately the performance of quic in v2ray is very low.<\/p>\n

Advantages compared to simple-obfs: the v2ray plugin works seamlessly through CF in http-websocket mode with any traffic, in tls mode it represents full-fledged tls traffic, requiring certificates to operate (for example, from let's encrypt or self-signed).<\/p>\n

shadowsocksv2ray-plugin-http: desc\u0103rcare — 1404 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1938 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nshadowsocksv2ray-plugin-tls: desc\u0103rcare — 1214 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1898 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nshadowsocksv2ray-plugin-quic: desc\u0103rcare — 183 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 384 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nA\u0219a cum am men\u021bionat, v2ray poate seta antete, astfel \u00eenc\u00e2t s\u0103 poat\u0103 fi utilizat prin intermediul unui reverse proxy CDN (de exemplu, Cloudflare). Pe de o parte, acest lucru complic\u0103 descoperirea tunelului, iar pe de alt\u0103 parte \u2014 poate cre\u0219te (de obicei) laten\u021ba \u2014 totul depinde de loca\u021bia dumneavoastr\u0103 \u0219i a serverelor. \u00cen prezent, CF testeaz\u0103 func\u021bionarea cu quic, dar deocamdat\u0103 acest mod nu este disponibil (cel pu\u021bin pentru conturile gratuite).<\/p>\n

shadowsocksv2ray-plugin-http+CF: desc\u0103rcare — 1284 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1785 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
\nshadowsocksv2ray-plugin-tls+CF: desc\u0103rcare — 1261 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare 1881 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Cloak<\/h4>\n

\nCloak este rezultatul dezvolt\u0103rii ulterioare a obfuscatorului GoQuiet. Simuleaz\u0103 traficul TLS, func\u021bion\u00e2nd astfel prin TCP. \u00cen prezent, autorul a lansat a doua versiune a pluginului, cloak-2, care difer\u0103 semnificativ de cloak-ul original. <\/p>\n

Conform informa\u021biilor furnizate de dezvoltator, prima versiune a pluginului utiliza mecanismul tls 1.2 resume session pentru a falsifica adresa de destina\u021bie pentru tls. Dup\u0103 lansarea noii versiuni (cloak-2), toate paginile wiki de pe GitHub care descriau acest mecanism au fost eliminate, iar \u00een prezentul descriptiv nu exist\u0103 men\u021biuni despre acesta. Conform autorului, prima versiune a cloak nu este utilizat\u0103 din cauza \"vulnerabilit\u0103\u021bilor critice \u00een criptografie\". \u00cen momentul test\u0103rii, existau doar prima versiune a cloak-ului, binarele fiind \u00eenc\u0103 disponibile pe GitHub, iar \u00een plus, vulnerabilit\u0103\u021bile critice nu sunt foarte importante, deoarece shadowsocks cripteaz\u0103 la fel de bine traficul, cu sau f\u0103r\u0103 cloak, iar impactul cloak-ului asupra criptografiei shadowsocks este minim. <\/p>\n

shadowsockscloak: desc\u0103rcare — 1533; \u00eenc\u0103rcare — 1970 mbits<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Kcptun<\/h4>\n

\nkcptun folose\u0219te ca transport protocolul KCP<\/a><\/noindex> \u0219i \u00een anumite cazuri speciale permite \u00eembun\u0103t\u0103\u021birea l\u0103\u021bimii de band\u0103. Din p\u0103cate (sau din fericire) acest lucru este \u00een mare parte relevant pentru utilizatorii din China continental\u0103, la care unii operatori de telefonie mobil\u0103 limiteaz\u0103 intens TCP \u0219i nu afecteaz\u0103 UDP.<\/p>\n

Kcptun este extrem de consumator de resurse, \u00eenc\u0103rc\u00e2nd 100% din 4 nuclee de procesare \u00een timpul test\u0103rii cu un singur client. De asemenea, pluginul este \"lent\" \u0219i, de asemenea, \u00een timpul func\u021bion\u0103rii prin iperf3 nu finalizeaz\u0103 testele. Ne orient\u0103m dup\u0103 speedtest-ul din browser.<\/p>\n

shadowsockskcptun: desc\u0103rcare (speedtest) — 546 mbits; \u00eenc\u0103rcare (speedtest) 854 mbits.<\/b>\"Compararea
\n<\/p>\n

Concluzie<\/h3>\n

\nAi nevoie de un VPN simplu \u0219i rapid pentru a ascunde traficul \u00eentregii ma\u0219ini? Atunci alegerea ta este Vaergard. Vrei s\u0103 folose\u0219ti proxy-uri (pentru tunelare selectiv\u0103 sau partajarea fluxurilor virtuale) sau te intereseaz\u0103 mai mult s\u0103 obfusci traficul pentru a evita blocajele severe? Atunci arunc\u0103 o privire la Shadowsocks cu obfuscare TLS HTTP. Vrei s\u0103 te asiguri c\u0103 internetul t\u0103u func\u021bioneaz\u0103 at\u00e2ta timp c\u00e2t internetul este disponibil? Alege s\u0103 \u00ee\u021bi proxy-ezi traficul prin CDN-uri importante, blocarea c\u0103rora va duce la c\u0103derea unei p\u0103r\u021bi din internet \u00een \u021bar\u0103.<\/p>\n

tabel de sintez\u0103, sortare dup\u0103 desc\u0103rcare<\/b>\"Compararea
\n
Sursa: habr.com<\/a><\/p>","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u041f\u043e \u043c\u0435\u0440\u0435 \u0442\u043e\u0433\u043e, \u043a\u0430\u043a \u043d\u0430\u043c \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0437\u0430\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0432\u0430\u044e\u0442 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f \u043a \u0440\u0430\u0437\u043b\u0438\u0447\u043d\u044b\u043c \u0440\u0435\u0441\u0443\u0440\u0441\u0430\u043c \u0432 \u0441\u0435\u0442\u0438, \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0432\u043e\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0430 \u0431\u043b\u043e\u043a\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u043a, \u0430 \u0437\u043d\u0430\u0447\u0438\u0442 \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0432\u043e\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441 \u00ab\u0410 \u043a\u0430\u043a \u0436\u0435 \u0431\u044b\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0435\u0435 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u044c \u0431\u043b\u043e\u043a\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043a\u0438?\u00bb. \u041e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u0438\u043c \u0442\u0435\u043c\u0443 \u044d\u0444\u0444\u0435\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438, \u0441 \u0442\u043e\u0447\u043a\u0438 \u0437\u0440\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0430 DPI\u0432\u0430\u0439\u0442\u043b\u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u0432\u0431\u043b\u0435\u043a\u043b\u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0434\u0440\u0443\u0433\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0441\u043b\u0443\u0447\u0430\u044f, \u0438 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441\u0442\u043e \u0441\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043d\u0438\u043c \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0438\u0437\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043f\u043e\u043f\u0443\u043b\u044f\u0440\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u0438\u043d\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0430 \u0431\u043b\u043e\u043a\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u043a. \u0412\u043d\u0438\u043c\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435: \u0412 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0435 \u043f\u043e\u0434 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false,"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"rendered","format":"html"}]},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[688],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-53774","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-administrirovanie"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\n","aioseo_head_json":{"title":"\ud83e\udd47Compararea performan\u021bei instrumentelor de ocoli blocajele VPN | ProHoster","description":"Pe m\u0103sur\u0103 ce accesul la diferite resurse online devine din ce \u00een ce mai restric\u021bionat, devine din ce \u00een ce mai relevant\u0103 \u00eentrebarea despre ocolirea blocajelor, astfel \u00eenc\u00e2t \u00eentrebarea 'Cum putem ocoli mai repede' devine tot mai pertinent\u0103.","canonical_url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/blog\/administrirovanie\/sravnenie-proizvoditelnosti-instrumentov-obhoda-blokirovok-vpn","robots":"max-image-preview:large","keywords":"","webmasterTools":{"miscellaneous":""},"schema":null,"og:locale":"ro_RO","og:site_name":"ProHoster | \u041a\u0443\u043f\u0438\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u0434\u0435\u0436\u043d\u044b\u0439 \u0445\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438\u043d\u0433 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0441\u0430\u0439\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u0441 \u0437\u0430\u0449\u0438\u0442\u043e\u0439 \u043e\u0442 DDoS, VPS VDS \u0441\u0435\u0440\u0432\u0435\u0440\u044b","og:type":"article","og:title":"\ud83e\udd47\u0421\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0438\u0437\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u0438\u043d\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u043e\u0432 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0430 \u0431\u043b\u043e\u043a\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u043aVPN | ProHoster","og:description":"\u041f\u043e \u043c\u0435\u0440\u0435 \u0442\u043e\u0433\u043e, \u043a\u0430\u043a \u043d\u0430\u043c \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0437\u0430\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0432\u0430\u044e\u0442 \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f \u043a \u0440\u0430\u0437\u043b\u0438\u0447\u043d\u044b\u043c \u0440\u0435\u0441\u0443\u0440\u0441\u0430\u043c \u0432 \u0441\u0435\u0442\u0438, \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0432\u043e\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0430 \u0431\u043b\u043e\u043a\u0438\u0440\u043e\u0432\u043e\u043a, \u0430 \u0437\u043d\u0430\u0447\u0438\u0442 \u0432\u0441\u0435 \u0430\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0430\u043b\u044c\u043d\u0435\u0435 \u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0438\u0442\u0441\u044f \u0432\u043e\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441 \u00ab\u0410 \u043a\u0430\u043a \u0436\u0435 \u0431\u044b\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0435\u0435 \u043e\u0431\u0445\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u044c.","og:url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/blog\/administrirovanie\/sravnenie-proizvoditelnosti-instrumentov-obhoda-blokirovok-vpn","og:image":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/logo-350.jpg","og:image:secure_url":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/logo-350.jpg","og:image:width":350,"og:image:height":350,"article:published_time":"2019-12-09T21:00:00+00:00","article:modified_time":"2020-02-18T11:01:42+00:00","article:publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/prohoster","article:author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/prohoster"},"aioseo_meta_data":{"post_id":"53774","title":null,"description":null,"keywords":null,"keyphrases":null,"primary_term":null,"canonical_url":null,"og_title":null,"og_description":null,"og_object_type":"default","og_image_type":"default","og_image_url":null,"og_image_width":null,"og_image_height":null,"og_image_custom_url":null,"og_image_custom_fields":null,"og_video":null,"og_custom_url":null,"og_article_section":null,"og_article_tags":null,"twitter_use_og":false,"twitter_card":"default","twitter_image_type":"default","twitter_image_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_url":null,"twitter_image_custom_fields":null,"twitter_title":null,"twitter_description":null,"schema":{"blockGraphs":[],"customGraphs":[],"default":{"data":{"Article":[],"Course":[],"Dataset":[],"FAQPage":[],"Movie":[],"Person":[],"Product":[],"ProductReview":[],"Car":[],"Recipe":[],"Service":[],"SoftwareApplication":[],"WebPage":[]},"graphName":"","isEnabled":true},"graphs":[]},"schema_type":null,"schema_type_options":null,"pillar_content":false,"robots_default":true,"robots_noindex":false,"robots_noarchive":false,"robots_nosnippet":false,"robots_nofollow":false,"robots_noimageindex":false,"robots_noodp":false,"robots_notranslate":false,"robots_max_snippet":null,"robots_max_videopreview":null,"robots_max_imagepreview":"large","priority":null,"frequency":null,"local_seo":null,"seo_analyzer_scan_date":"2026-02-08 20:46:20","breadcrumb_settings":null,"limit_modified_date":false,"reviewed_by":null,"ai":null,"created":"2021-02-28 11:56:36","updated":"2026-02-08 20:46:20","focus_keyword":null,"additional_keywords":null,"truseo_locale":null},"gt_translate_keys":[{"key":"link","format":"url"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53774","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=53774"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53774\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":157849,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/53774\/revisions\/157849"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=53774"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=53774"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prohoster.info\/ro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=53774"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}